But it is thought they may back it if a bridge at Belvedere was also given the go ahead, meaning Bexley could be in line for two new crossings.

A council spokesman said: “We welcome the fact that the link at Belvedere is to be included in the consultation because we think it could create significant opportunities for local residents and businesses on both sides of the river as well as help to deliver the mayor’s plans for London’s growth.

“However, any such link would need to include measures to minimise the risk of negative impacts on the environment and traffic in the north of the borough and be mindful of the infrastructure needed for growth.

Architects HOK have designed the Gallions Reach plans.

“Some of the options – including a link at Gallions Reach – may have an adverse impact on Bexley without any of the benefits that the right kind of growth could bring.”

It is thought a Belvedere bridge would link up with Crabtree Manorway North or Anderson Way.

Comments

Dimpydibbles
5:07pm Wed 2 Jul 14

This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.

This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.Dimpydibbles

This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.

Score: -27

Joelo
3:38pm Wed 2 Jul 14

How long has this been going on? We should have had a bridge built years ago instead all we keep getting is consultations! Just get on and build the dam thing!

How long has this been going on? We should have had a bridge built years ago instead all we keep getting is consultations! Just get on and build the dam thing!Joelo

How long has this been going on? We should have had a bridge built years ago instead all we keep getting is consultations! Just get on and build the dam thing!

Score: 19

Joelo
6:07pm Wed 2 Jul 14

Dimpydibbles wrote…

This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.

Yes there are better links for public transport in some areas, not Thamesmead however. but what about people who drive?

There are 22 river crossings in west London, is that area more polluted? No, it's more prosperous then East London.

[quote][p][bold]Dimpydibbles[/bold] wrote:
This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.[/p][/quote]Yes there are better links for public transport in some areas, not Thamesmead however. but what about people who drive?
There are 22 river crossings in west London, is that area more polluted? No, it's more prosperous then East London.Joelo

Dimpydibbles wrote…

This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.

Yes there are better links for public transport in some areas, not Thamesmead however. but what about people who drive?

There are 22 river crossings in west London, is that area more polluted? No, it's more prosperous then East London.

Score: 29

Gypo.Joe
7:00pm Wed 2 Jul 14

Just get it built. Its long over due.

Just get it built. Its long over due.Gypo.Joe

Just get it built. Its long over due.

Score: 15

Lady Boy Erastusia
8:08pm Wed 2 Jul 14

Tories vote against the bridge. Bacon plays a lead on London councils. The reason east London is poorer than west London is a lack of crossings. Nightmares at Thurrock are regular. Why do labour members have common sense

Tories vote against the bridge. Bacon plays a lead on London councils. The reason east London is poorer than west London is a lack of crossings. Nightmares at Thurrock are regular. Why do labour members have common senseLady Boy Erastusia

Tories vote against the bridge. Bacon plays a lead on London councils. The reason east London is poorer than west London is a lack of crossings. Nightmares at Thurrock are regular. Why do labour members have common sense

Score: 3

oBLiVioN 70
8:08pm Wed 2 Jul 14

Dimpydibbles wrote…

This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.

We all know it's needed but nobody seems to want it near them, I'll believe this when I actually see contractors actually building it.

If the bridges are built with a public transport option included as the original gateway bridge had proposed then life would be better for everyone. It would cost me over £15 to get from Dartford to Grays by train and there is no other option after 7pm so obviously I drive when I need to go, I wonder how many other cars are on the crossing because they have no real alternative despite having, as you say, much better transport links, they all go toward london. A simple journey like woolwich to barking is a bit of a mission by public transport, not that I've ever wanted to do that journey but I bet a lot do.

[quote][p][bold]Dimpydibbles[/bold] wrote:
This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.[/p][/quote]We all know it's needed but nobody seems to want it near them, I'll believe this when I actually see contractors actually building it.
If the bridges are built with a public transport option included as the original gateway bridge had proposed then life would be better for everyone. It would cost me over £15 to get from Dartford to Grays by train and there is no other option after 7pm so obviously I drive when I need to go, I wonder how many other cars are on the crossing because they have no real alternative despite having, as you say, much better transport links, they all go toward london. A simple journey like woolwich to barking is a bit of a mission by public transport, not that I've ever wanted to do that journey but I bet a lot do.oBLiVioN 70

Dimpydibbles wrote…

This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.

We all know it's needed but nobody seems to want it near them, I'll believe this when I actually see contractors actually building it.

If the bridges are built with a public transport option included as the original gateway bridge had proposed then life would be better for everyone. It would cost me over £15 to get from Dartford to Grays by train and there is no other option after 7pm so obviously I drive when I need to go, I wonder how many other cars are on the crossing because they have no real alternative despite having, as you say, much better transport links, they all go toward london. A simple journey like woolwich to barking is a bit of a mission by public transport, not that I've ever wanted to do that journey but I bet a lot do.

Score: 21

mouthalmighty
12:11am Thu 3 Jul 14

Joelo wrote…

Dimpydibbles wrote…

This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.

Yes there are better links for public transport in some areas, not Thamesmead however. but what about people who drive?

There are 22 river crossings in west London, is that area more polluted? No, it's more prosperous then East London.

Prosperity is the goal we all strive for. A little bit of help, ie the bridge/s, would go a long way for us southies.

[quote][p][bold]Joelo[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Dimpydibbles[/bold] wrote:
This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.[/p][/quote]Yes there are better links for public transport in some areas, not Thamesmead however. but what about people who drive?
There are 22 river crossings in west London, is that area more polluted? No, it's more prosperous then East London.[/p][/quote]Prosperity is the goal we all strive for. A little bit of help, ie the bridge/s, would go a long way for us southies.mouthalmighty

Joelo wrote…

Dimpydibbles wrote…

This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.

Yes there are better links for public transport in some areas, not Thamesmead however. but what about people who drive?

There are 22 river crossings in west London, is that area more polluted? No, it's more prosperous then East London.

Prosperity is the goal we all strive for. A little bit of help, ie the bridge/s, would go a long way for us southies.

Score: 18

ron.1952
1:58am Thu 3 Jul 14

What about the trees though ? No one cares about them.

Ron x

What about the trees though ? No one cares about them.
Ron xron.1952

What about the trees though ? No one cares about them.

Ron x

Score: -13

bexley-is-bonkers
11:07am Thu 3 Jul 14

Dimpydibbles wrote…

This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.

This isn't really true is it? The Inspector found against the original mid 1990s Oxleas Wood plan, not Ken Livingstone's less ambitious scheme.

[quote][p][bold]Dimpydibbles[/bold] wrote:
This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.[/p][/quote]This isn't really true is it? The Inspector found against the original mid 1990s Oxleas Wood plan, not Ken Livingstone's less ambitious scheme.bexley-is-bonkers

Dimpydibbles wrote…

This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.

This isn't really true is it? The Inspector found against the original mid 1990s Oxleas Wood plan, not Ken Livingstone's less ambitious scheme.

Score: 2

highway warrior
11:08am Thu 3 Jul 14

Its all marshland, industrial estates and factories. Build it and soon!

Its all marshland, industrial estates and factories. Build it and soon!highway warrior

Its all marshland, industrial estates and factories. Build it and soon!

Score: 16

councillorwaters
6:34pm Fri 4 Jul 14

bexley-is-bonkers wrote…

Dimpydibbles wrote…

This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.

This isn't really true is it? The Inspector found against the original mid 1990s Oxleas Wood plan, not Ken Livingstone's less ambitious scheme.

Bexley is bonkers is wrong as usual. The inspector gave a devastating indictment of the Ken Livingstone scheme.

[quote][p][bold]bexley-is-bonkers[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Dimpydibbles[/bold] wrote:
This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.[/p][/quote]This isn't really true is it? The Inspector found against the original mid 1990s Oxleas Wood plan, not Ken Livingstone's less ambitious scheme.[/p][/quote]Bexley is bonkers is wrong as usual. The inspector gave a devastating indictment of the Ken Livingstone scheme.councillorwaters

bexley-is-bonkers wrote…

Dimpydibbles wrote…

This is doubly devastating news for Plumstead. Yesterday's news was bad enough, with either residential streets clogged with vehicles including a good many lorries, or a four to six lane trunk road ploughing through hundreds of houses, the farm and 8,000 year old woodlands. Today's announcement of a second bridge at Belvedere is a double whammy. Yes, Joelo, a bridge has been contemplated for several years. However, 1. The inspectors found against the bridges in light of compelling evidence demonstrating that claims made by the pro-bridge lobby did not stand up to scrutiny and 2. Transport communications between E And SE London have improved vastly with the Jubilee Line extension, the DLR and Crossrail.

This isn't really true is it? The Inspector found against the original mid 1990s Oxleas Wood plan, not Ken Livingstone's less ambitious scheme.

Bexley is bonkers is wrong as usual. The inspector gave a devastating indictment of the Ken Livingstone scheme.

Score: 0

Dolly Rotten
6:20pm Sat 5 Jul 14

This is a much better idea than the Silvertown tunnel. I was in support of the Thames Gateway Bridge, as it was not going to decimate any woodland like the old ELRC was going to, and we need a crossing this end. Sadly Bexley council are a bunch of NIMBYs and Boris likes to keep his Tory cronies happy.

This is a much better idea than the Silvertown tunnel. I was in support of the Thames Gateway Bridge, as it was not going to decimate any woodland like the old ELRC was going to, and we need a crossing this end. Sadly Bexley council are a bunch of NIMBYs and Boris likes to keep his Tory cronies happy.Dolly Rotten

This is a much better idea than the Silvertown tunnel. I was in support of the Thames Gateway Bridge, as it was not going to decimate any woodland like the old ELRC was going to, and we need a crossing this end. Sadly Bexley council are a bunch of NIMBYs and Boris likes to keep his Tory cronies happy.

Score: 6

PaulErith
8:45am Tue 8 Jul 14

Just fill the Thames in. No need for any bridges then.

Just fill the Thames in. No need for any bridges then.PaulErith

Just fill the Thames in. No need for any bridges then.

Score: 5

VoteForMe
6:11pm Wed 9 Jul 14

Put in better public transport or no bridge!

Either put more DLR stations in that area as is badly needed or any proposed bridge can do one.

Put in better public transport or no bridge!
Either put more DLR stations in that area as is badly needed or any proposed bridge can do one.VoteForMe

Put in better public transport or no bridge!

Either put more DLR stations in that area as is badly needed or any proposed bridge can do one.

Ipsoregulated

This website and associated newspapers adhere to the Independent Press Standards Organisation's Editors' Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about the editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then please contact the editor here. If you are dissatisfied with the response provided you can contact IPSO here